Disposed

Sri Harish Poonja v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Jul 2024WP/14201/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an MLA, sought quashing of an FIR for IPC Sections 504 and 353 offences after a charge sheet was filed. The court held no special circumstances justified invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C., relegated him to seek discharge before the trial court with liberty to apply within four weeks without personal presence.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to move a discharge application under Section 239 or 228 CrPC within four weeks; trial judge not to insist on personal presence until decided; contentions kept open.

Sri Harish Poonja Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:25546 WP No. 14201 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 14201 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. HARISH POONJA, S/O MUTHANNA POONJA, AGED BOUT 37 YEARS, PRESENTLY SITTING MLA OF BELTHANGADY TALUK RESIDENT OF MITHILA NILAYA, GARDADI POST AND VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK, DAKSHIKNA KANNADA DISTRICT 574 214.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. PRABHULIN K NAVADGI., SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. SUSHAL TIWARI.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH BELTHANGADI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE LD. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶13

MR.MURALIDHARA NAIK KG, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, SON OF NOT KNOWN, POLICE SUB-INSPECT.., BELTHANGADI PS WORKING AT BELTHANGADI POLICE STATION, TALUK OFFICE ROAD, POLICE QUARTERS, BELTHANGADY, KARNATAKA - 574 214.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI.B N JAGADEESH., ADDL SPP)

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,1950 READ WITH

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:25546 WP No. 14201 of 2024

¶18

SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO I) PASS AN ORDER QUASHING THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0057/2024 DTD 19.05.24 REGISTERED BY BELTHANGADY POLICE PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BELTHANGADY, DAKSHINA KANNADA REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504 AND 353 OF IPC (ANNEXURE- A), IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioners are knocking at the doors of this Court

¶22

invoking the inherent jurisdiction for the quashment of CC No.18210/2024 pending before Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Belthangady, Dakshina Kannada. The Charge Sheet has been filed by the jurisdictional Police after investigation.

¶23

Learned Sr. Advocate Sri. Prabhulinga Nawadgi appearing for the Petitioners presses into service the Apex

¶24

Court in STATE OF HARYANA vs. CHOWDHARY

¶25

BHAJAN LAL, AIR 1992 SC 604 for the quashment saying that even if entire charge sheet material is taken into consideration, no charge would be brought home and

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:25546 WP No. 14201 of 2024

¶27

therefore the entire proceedings would amount to abuse of

¶28

process of court and of law.

¶29

Learned Addl. SPP on request accepting notice for both the Respondents vehemently opposes the Petition contending that it is open to the Petitioners to seek discharge under Section 229 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and they can move an Application in that regard, they can await hearing at the hands of the learned trial Judge whilst framing the charge, the Charge Sheet having been already filed; when such an efficacious remedy avails, ordinarily litigants cannot be allowed to tap the inherent jurisdiction of this Court. He also adds that in several other similar matters, this Court has relegated such litigants of the kind to the trial Court for seeking discharge.

¶30

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶31

and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submission made by the learned Addl. SPP on behalf of Respondents. The Apex Court time and again has warned that tapping of inherent

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:25546 WP No. 14201 of 2024

¶33

jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Code cannot be as a matter of course and that, even if tapped, the jurisdiction shall be sparingly exercised. This Court is flooded with several such matters and in them already the track is beaten by relegating the litigants to the Trial Court with liberty to seek discharge. No special circumstances, despite vehement submissions are demonstrated as to why this Court should leave the beaten track and adopt a different procedure favourable to the litigants herein; no prejudice would be caused to the Petitioners by going back to the trial Judge and seek discharge at his hands inasmuch as, in matters like this, this Court has directed the trial judges not to insist upon personal presence of the accused once the Application is filed for discharge and a final decision after hearing of all the concerned thereon is taken. That would mitigate hardship which otherwise arguably could have occasioned to them.

¶34

In the above circumstances, this Petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the Petitioners to move discharge

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:25546 WP No. 14201 of 2024

¶36

application either under Section 239 or 228 of the 1973

¶37

Code within a period of four weeks in accordance with law before Trial Court.

¶38

The learned trial judge is requested not to insist upon personal presence of the petitioner-accused if they apply for discharge and till a decision thereon is taken. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/JUDGE

Bsv

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

Sri Harish Poonja v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Harish Poonja v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri v Somanna Vs Sri Ramakrishna

Anil Kumar Shetty K Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Punitha K C Vs State of Karnataka

Jayananda Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Rajesh M K Vs State of Karnataka

T B Jayachandra Vs State of Karnataka